FULL STEAM AHEAD, LUMIX

jalywol wrote:

But, this is 4:3 format, not 16:9, by definition. If you make it with a 16:9 sensor, then you are making a smaller 4:3 area, and going backwards,

Change the name to Micro Video Mount than. XD As long as the mount is the same, I think changing Aspect Ratios of the senor if it can helps with market penetration, why not?

Now, if they made a multi-aspect sensor, like the GH2 had, then you would have what you want, and they would still have 4:3 capability without sacrificing pixels when used in that format.

Well, a 18.5x13mm sensor sounds nice then. It will be 18.5x10.4mm in 16:9 mode and the normal 17.3x13mm in 4:3 mode. Just that the resulting 10:7 Sensor would be a rather weird Aspect Ratio. But it might just works. Ideally, resolution be 6144x4300. So it will be 6K in 16:9 mode and 24.7Mpx in 4:3 Mode.

Another option is to design the senor to be optimized for both 19:10 Cine and 4:3 Stills, which means we will need a 19x13mm, which is, well 19:13, somewhere between 10:7 and 3:2 Aspect Ratio. If we want to go for Digital Cine Production, the Sensor would be 4096x2800. So we will get 4096 × 2160, 4K in 19:9 Cine Mode and 3734x2800, 10.5Mpx in 4:3 Mode. 16:9 I estimate it should be around 3968x2232, sorta in 4K, maybe can shoot 16:9 Stills in 3968x2232 but turn on EIS to capture 3840 × 2160 for common 4K standard. Both works. Or make it 19x13mm, 6144x4204 pixels for 6k in Cine, 5.7K in 16:9 and 23.7Mp in 4:3.

Come to think of it, 19x13mm 4096x2800 sounds the best, 4K is good enough for at least the next 5 years, and 10.5Mp should be good enough for non pixel peeping. Higher resolutions might leads to higher cost, as well as a greater need for cooling thus a bigger device. 4096x2800 would give excellent 4K videos and reasonable stills, those whom needs even higher resolution stills might want to consider moving up to APS-C.